Protocol for a mixed methods process evaluation of the Smoking Treatment Optimisation in Pharmacies (STOP) trial
Jumbe, S.; Madurasinghe, V.; Houlihan, C.; Jumbe, S. L.; James, W. Y.; Taylor, S.; Walton, R.
Show abstract
IntroductionAssessing the fidelity of complex behavioural interventions and examining the contextual reasons why such interventions succeed, or fail are important activities but challenging and rarely reported. The Smoking Treatment Optimisation in Pharmacies (STOP) trial is a cluster randomised trial evaluating the effectiveness of a complex intervention to optimise the National Health Service (NHS) Stop Smoking Service delivered in community pharmacies. This complex intervention comprises a training package for pharmacy staff involving motivational interviewing and communication skills aimed at increasing smoking cessation knowledge and proactive client engagement. We report on a process evaluation which was planned alongside the trial to offer findings that will assist in the interpretation of the main trial results and help inform potential implementation in community pharmacy settings on a wider scale. Methods and analysisQuantitative data on recruitment and retention process of pharmacies, pharmacy staff and service users has been collected during the trial along with data on dose and fidelity of the intervention delivery from participating intervention arm pharmacies to identify potential implementation issues. Simulated client data on behaviour change skills and display of intervention materials from both control and intervention pharmacies is being assessed. These data will be combined with qualitative data; including adviser-smoker consultation recordings that provide a snapshot of behaviour skills delivery by stop smoking advisers and semi-structured interviews with pharmacy staff and services users from the intervention arm. DiscussionPublished protocols for process evaluations of complex health interventions are still rare despite increasing funding for this work to facilitate understanding of trial outcomes from an implementation perspective. This mixed methods protocol will contribute to the developing literature around the conduct of process evaluation and the value they add to health services research. Trial registration number ISRCTN16351033. Strengths and limitations of this studyO_LIA planned mixed methods process evaluation that draws together data from different sources to help explain the trial results and establish the feasibility of scaling this complex intervention up in community pharmacy settings. C_LIO_LIA strength is the use of a previously tested mystery shopping method to assess fidelity of skills performance at the pharmacy counter C_LIO_LIThe process evaluation relies on willing pharmacy staff and service users involved in the trial to collect some of the data, which may introduce bias. C_LIO_LIThis paper also provides a detailed example of how to use the MRC framework for process evaluation of complex interventions to design an extensive process evaluation within trial settings. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The MultimorbiditY COllaborative Medication Review And DEcision Making (MyComrade) study: A protocol for a cross-border pilot cluster randomised controlled trial 92%
- Evaluating Diuretics in Normal Care (EVIDENCE): A feasibility report of a pilot cluster randomised trial of prescribing policy in primary care to compare the effectiveness of thiazide-type diuretics in hypertension 91%
- A complex ePrescribing-based Anti-Microbial Stewardship (ePAMS+) intervention for hospitals combining technological and behavioural components: protocol for a feasibility trial 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of the General Practice Pharmacist (GPP) intervention to optimise prescribing in Irish primary care: a non-randomised pilot study 92%
- A Rapid Realist Review of the Role of Community Pharmacy in the Public Health Response to COVID-19 92%
- A factorial randomised controlled trial to examine the potential effect of a text-message based intervention on reducing adolescent susceptibility to e-cigarette use: A study protocol 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Effectiveness of Online Training in Improving Primary Care Doctors Competency in Brief Tobacco Interventions: A Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial of WHO Modules in Delta State, Nigeria 91%
- Non-medical prescribing policy in the United Kingdom National Health Service: systematic review and narrative synthesis 90%
- Investigating the use of a one-page infographic to improve recruitment and retention to the BASIL+ Randomised Controlled Trial: A Study Within a Trial (SWAT) 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Understanding the Challenges of Medicine Optimisation Among Older People From Ethnic Minority Communities (Aged 60 Years and Above) With Polypharmacy in Primary Care: A Realist Review Protocol 91%
- Community mobilisation approaches to preventing and reducing adolescent multiple risk behaviour: a realist review protocol 88%
- To Include or Not to Include? A prescription from the pharmacy on how to use active learning assisted screening in systematic reviews 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Detecting heterogeneity of intervention effects using analysis and meta-analysis of differences in variance between arms of a trial 86%
- Assessing Direct and Spillover Effects of Intervention Packages in Network-Randomized Studies 85%
- Evaluating the impact of keeping indoor dining closed on COVID-19 rates among large US cities: a quasi-experimental design 83%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.